Molusi v Safety And Security Sectoral Bargaining Council and Others (JR2046/10) [2014] ZALCJHB 275 (25 July 2014)

Molusi v Safety And Security Sectoral Bargaining Council and Others (JR2046/10) [2014] ZALCJHB 275 (25 July 2014)

The applicant failed to provide a satisfactory and comprehensive explanation for the two and a half year delay in filing the review application. The purported attempts to obtain clarity regarding the arbitration award were vague, lacking specific dates and details, and did not justify the inordinate delay. The letter from the applicant's attorney did not indicate any genuine uncertainty about the award's meaning. Given the poor explanation and the absence of compelling reasons, it would not be in the interests of justice to grant condonation. As a result, the application for condonation and the review of the arbitration award were dismissed. No order as to costs was made, as the court did...

Citation
[2014] ZALCJHB 275
Parties
Applicant: Inspector M.A Molusi; Respondent: Safety and Security Sectoral Bargaining Council; Respondent: Paul Kirsten N.O; Respondent: Minister of Safety and Security; Respondent: South African Police Services Commissioner of Police
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
25 July 2014
Case Number
JR2046/10
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Application for Condonation for Late Filing of Review; Review of Arbitration Award
Outcome
Application for condonation and review dismissed with no order as to costs.
Judges
Molahlehi
Legal Topics
Condonation for Late Filing, Individual Dismissal, Arbitration Award Review, Unfair Dismissal
Labour Law Civil Procedure Condonation for Late Filing Individual Dismissal Arbitration Award Review Unfair Dismissal

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Inspector M.A Molusi

Applicant

Safety and Security Sectoral Bargaining Council

Respondent

Paul Kirsten N.O

Respondent

Minister of Safety and Security

Respondent

South African Police Services Commissioner of Police

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Application for Condonation for Late Filing of Review; Review of Arbitration Award

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the applicant provided a satisfactory explanation for the two and a half year delay in filing the review application.
  2. 2 Whether the interests of justice require condonation for the late filing of the review application.
  3. 3 Whether the arbitrator's compensation award was irrational or failed to consider relevant factors.

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to provide a satisfactory and comprehensive explanation for the two and a half year delay in filing the review application. The purported attempts to obtain clarity regarding the arbitration award were vague, lacking specific dates and details, and did not justify the inordinate delay. The letter from the applicant's attorney did not indicate any genuine uncertainty about the award's meaning. Given the poor explanation and the absence of compelling reasons, it would not be in the interests of justice to grant condonation. As a result, the application for condonation and the review of the arbitration award were dismissed. No order as to costs was made, as the court did...

Court Disposition

Application for condonation and review dismissed with no order as to costs.

Orders

  • The applicant’s application to review and set aside the arbitration award under case number PSSSBC 829–06/07 is dismissed.
  • No order as to costs.